Can I ask, what Australian laws prevent a seller changing the business model in such a way?
In the UK I think there are laws around being miss-sold stuff or where items sold are misrepresented but I'm no expert on this.
Lifetime backers
- Thread starter JosiahD
- Start date
- Status
Can I ask, what Australian laws prevent a seller changing the business model in such a way?
In the UK I think there are laws around being miss-sold stuff or where items sold are misrepresented but I'm no expert on this.
I don't think you are changing anyone's minds here. Maybe you can agree to disagree?
It was based on what Frontier said, the mistake I made was assuming they wouldn't bait and switch into a free season model after taking the money.
Oh so sorry gentle Sir, I will refrain in case you run and tell someone I have been a big meanie ….Well I suppose that's going to depend isn't itI'll acknowledge it.
I think you are trying to make this personal M00ka. Discuss the post, not the poster please.
So is this generic enough?
Why should FD give any form of response when some here who are doing the most complaining clearly state they won't accept any response unless it is the one they want to read. Anything else is totally ignored, immediately consigned to the round filing cabinet and those demanding a reply continue asking for one, totally impervious to the fact they look like total idiots or pedantic children.
How can I make this statement with such accuracy? Well here are two examples where FD did state categorically that two aspects of the game were not going to be changed. The first was the re-introduction of the ADS and the second whether off ship cargo storage would ever be allowed. Yet we still have regular threads demanding the return of the ADS and the introduction of storage facilities.
What part is rubbish, that happened right?
LEPs get all the seasons free of charge, but oh now seasons are free anyway.
It's true that both consumers and investors may buy a product, but an investor does so with the expectation that it will appreciate in value. A consumer purchases a product for use, based on an assessment of its utility compared to its cost, with any eventual appreciation being incidental to the purpose of the transaction.
I'd be interested to see how you feel someone could expect an LEP to appreciate in value over time. Note, getting more updates than the cost of the LEP is not appreciation, nor is getting more updates than you thought you'd get at the time the LEP was bought. In those circumstances the LEP will certainly represent better value to the individual than they anticipated it would at the time of purchase but that's because their expectation at the time of purchase was inaccurate, not because the item has any more intrinsic value that it did at that time. The LEP was always worth the cost of all potential future updates.
As for kickstarters, simply backing a kickstarter isn't in any way an investment in the company because there is no transfer of equity, in fact that is specifically prohibited by kickstarter's t&cs. All that you will ever receive is the defined benefit stated at the time the transaction was undertaken; it's essentially a group purchase scheme with a caveat that unless sufficient people agree to purchase in advance, the product will not be made available for sale to begin with. I know people think of it as investing but it isn't. It's a purchase. The fact that the product would not get made without those transactions does not make them investments.
Let's just wait & see what FDev have to say. Shouldn't take more than 6-12 months.
Can you define who you mean by fdev - as you have had Paige's reply for the CM team posted here and have also been pointed to support, and won't accept either. What part of fdev are you trying to get a response from? It would help 'fdev' respond to you. Also would be worthwhile stating what you are asking, as this thread is ... all over the place.
The only thing you've got right so far is where you admitted not reading the information from FDEV about likely outcomes and DLC before buying the LEP.
Aside from that you are just making it up, which is how you got yourself into this mess.
They already refused your refund.
Apart from the next paid update, and for all we know, another five after that. That's the point I was making earlier - the fact they have done some free updates doesn't in any way mean that they lied or misrepresented anything about the LEP because they never said there would only be paid updates. They just said that there would be no additional cost to LEP holders for any updates that are sold. It's not even disingenuous, it's a flat-out factual statement.
If they'd said there would be a paid update every year, or every two years, or that there would be four released by Dcember 2019, or that all updates would be paid, you could have them in court tomorrow because consumer protection legisltation covers those scenarios in that the product would not be as advertised. None of them do apply though.
You provide many non-answers to questions.
You say something, I ask to clarify and then each time you're just off onto something else.
In this instance rather than answering the question you are just saying I am wrong all the time.
Ok thanks good chat.
Hmm, Bait n Switch rules would probably apply. Umm, it could also be argued that the change from a 'retail product' to a 'subscription model' would breach the original terms of sale - especially of they did it without consultation and didn't offer an alternative.
This applies to PC only, as consoles already have a subscription model attached, even if it is 3rd party.
If the "New Era" corresponds to what is said below, then I can say that my LEP will have been a good investment.
"The future for Elite Dangerous is also exciting. Frontier is developing a major new paid-for release for the iconic space simulation which will dramatically expand gameplay and mark the beginning of a new era for Elite Dangerous. This will be characterised by significant new features to appeal to existing commanders, whilst being specifically designed to be a compelling, attractive and welcoming entry point for new players. Targeted for launch at the end of 2020, this major new release on multiple platforms will fall into financial year 2021 (the 12 months ending 31 May 2021)."
"The future for Elite Dangerous is also exciting. Frontier is developing a major new paid-for release for the iconic space simulation which will dramatically expand gameplay and mark the beginning of a new era for Elite Dangerous. This will be characterised by significant new features to appeal to existing commanders, whilst being specifically designed to be a compelling, attractive and welcoming entry point for new players. Targeted for launch at the end of 2020, this major new release on multiple platforms will fall into financial year 2021 (the 12 months ending 31 May 2021)."
Your normal understanding of the word season is wrong. I know several TV series where a season doesn't air each year.
I don't doubt they had the wording covered, I think Frontier have been very careful about that to avoid any possible liability.
I don't think I have mentioned the legal argument at all either, but I've said a number of times I believe that they have not made good on the deal, that they've not done the right thing by folk who bought into the LEP. Communication and making good on LEP value was always possible had they felt it important, it's just they didn't feel it ever was.
I do find the argument that they never guaranteed every year a bit disingenuous. It is of course right and I'm not saying we expected yearly on the dot updates or anything, I work as a programmer. But we all know that development fell waaay behind schedule which has impacted the LEP, and we all know the switch to free seasons was not intended from the outset and came about due to a serious rethink post-Horizons fallout.
Yes such things were a possibility but expectations for neither Frontier nor the backers were that it would have played out the way it did. So Frontier made it's changes and LEP owners caught the ****ty end of the stick as a result, worth noting that LEP owners have zero say in anything when pointing out what the cause of the problem was/is.
Last edited:
That is good, my feeling is/was the 2020/21 DLC will be free, I do think it makes a lot of sense not to charge for it.
But given they've put paid-for in a trading statement means they are at least relatively sure that's the plan, it would have been very easy to leave out the paid-for part if there was still some uncertainty about it.
That's a new one
This thread is indeed all over the place. Bunch of over-reacting gibberish from people unable to understand that some are annoyed about something and others aren't.
I propose a solution that suits everyone (and that I would happily accept) and I get asked to define what an official statement is? I'm not a lawyer
Ok but being able to name a couple of series where it's not the case doesn't mean it's not the normal understanding.
The season part is down to it being aired in a season, the season cycling yearly, so normally you'd have the next season the following year.
- Status